Hopefully when Gonzo opens the door it's the Landshark and he eats Gonzalez so he cannot uselessly plug up left field.

The "BOB" is now Chase Field. Not nearly as fun to say but unfortunately, more accurate. Seems like Ned is doing what he did last year... filling the roster with a mix of aging vets and hungry prospects and letting them fight it out and earn playing time. I don't know that Gonzo makes us better but I also think he will sit if 2 of 3 from the Kemp, Loney, Ethier trio are tearing it up.

"Need any help?"
"Oh, all I can get."

(fill in the blank for how this relates to the current situation)

I think that like last year, the best thing that can happen to us is that the aging vets start to hurt themselves

One thing is for sure: there wil be no 9th inning back-to-back-to-back-to-back HRs with this line-up.

You have to give the D'Backs credit. The Mets have Green, we now have Gonzo and they have neither. We can only hope that Gonzo abuses the D'Backs the way Green abuses us.

4- and I'm currently in around January 2007, so last year was 2006

LA Times printed a rumor that there could be a Penny for Vernon Wells trade in the works. Are we now just pretending that we didn't sign Pierre?

Has anyone commented on the value of delaying the arbitration/free agency years of someone like Kemp by signing a mediocre veteran to keep him in the minors longer? Seems to me part of the point of signing guys like Gonzo is to get more long term benefit out of the kids, still having control of them in their prime years.

7 - as I said in an earlier post, centerfielders are the new shortstop. We'll probably end up picking up either Edmonds or Jones too

Actually Baldelli or DeJesus is a bit more like it

Three pools of players:

Pierre, Gonzo, Wolf, Nomar

and

Jim Edmonds, Aramis Ramirez, Jason Schmidt, JD Drew

and

Matt Kemp, Andre Ethier, James Loney, Hong Chi Kuo

Best maximize the talent on the Dodgers, all the well knowing you have a budget of 132 mils (the amount Ned has thus far spent on Wolf, Nomar, Pierre, Schmidt, Gonzales).

I'm not on the fence on this one.
I think Ned's done a really poor job of allocating funds.

He's spent alot.
But the sum doesnt really add up.

8 - That's a good, under-discussed point. Back when Guzman was the top prospect here, DePodesta said he didn't want to rush him up to the bigs in part so that he would retain more of his prime.

Why not use that money on Gagne for 4 innings of work? ...wait...

7
I have read the same thing. The Mets are looking for a veteran SP, but are not high on Penny. I like the surplus that we are gathering, but it makes me wonder if Penny will the the one dealt. I think that it is more likely that a lower profile deal will emerge involving Hendrickson/Tomko/Stults.

Ned, don't mortgage the farm for Wells unless you can sign him to an extension.

8. I really can't believe that we would keep Kemp or anyone else in the minor leagues if we thought he was ready to contribute in any real way right now. I guess it could be a factor in a close call but I think production is the determining factor of whether a guy comes up or not.

"And if one thing seems clear about the Colletti-Grady Little regime, it's that they don't like handing starting jobs to rookies but they do like seeing the kids take them. If Kemp or Loney are hitting, eventually they will play."

Well said, Jon. And, to Colletti's credit, he's had a hand in building a pretty strong rotation, which will allow him to trade from a position of strength. (He doesn't have to trade a starter; he could put Billingsley and Kuo in Las Vegas to start the season.)

"No... Gonzo straight!"

"No... Gonzo straight!"

But those crazy routes are how Gonzo gets his exercise.

I'm hearing that Hendrickson might go to the Cubs now for spare parts.

When does too much depth in the farm system become a problem? I think the answer is when the spots aren't available. Clogging the Majors with mediocrity (see Gonzo, Pierre, Anderson, Tomko and Hendrickson) seems to be a poor choice of fund allocation. At least Gonzo is a short-term fix.

You have to admire Colletti's approach to pay more now, and keep these guys for less time. I just wonder what happened with Pierre then...

Though the Gonzo signing is not ideal, it means that we will not be trading for someone like Jacque Jones and that we will keep our farm nucleus intact.

My feeling is that Ned is mostly finished save for dealing for some spare parts using guys like Hall and Tomko. Personally, I like what we have this year, though we won't be putting up too many 6 run innings on anyone. Only one bad deal (Pierre) and a lot of short term deals with guys that want to be here and NO KIDS GONE. I like our chances to get to the NLCS with this team and then take the next step in 2008 with Loney, Kemp, and Elbert all on the big club.

I have to believe that we are going to make one more big move (trade). We have too much starting pitching and too many teams need starting pitching. We also have more prospects than can realistically all play and teams need young talent. Something's got to give.

It does seem a little odd, to have Ethier, Repko, Werth, Anderson, Pierre, and Gonzales. SuperAdequate. Yep.

Also, I was OK with Valentin. Boom injured and out at the beginning. And I was OK, even happy, with Mueller. Boom injured and out at the beginning. And now Gonzalez. Seems like wasted money to me. Maybe I'll be wrong again. Let's Hope.

it means that we will not be trading for someone like Jacque Jones

I dont think trading for someone like Pat Burrell would have been bad though.

I think I have finally figured out Colletti's rationale on the Pierre and Gonzo signings. He likes Martin so much that he wants to reduce the chance of injury with those risky plays at the plate. For 2007, all singles with a runner on second will now be automatically conceded runs, saving us from biting our fingernails in worry as Martin will avoid getting bowled over by any overaggressive baserunners.

Unfortunately, we may have created new opportunities for plays at the plate, as runners on first will now likely try to score on singles into left and center fields.

And we know Kemp could fill in and maybe Delwyn Young, too.

20
I think that you have brought up a good point that I have not really considered. We have a 25-man roster and by my count, here are the young'uns (sorry, I'm from Louisiana) that could realistically be on the big club:

Kemp
Loney
Kuo
Miller
Elbert (mid-season)
LaRoche
Stults (maybe a stretch)

That is almost 30% of our roster. You're right. Something is going to have to give.

25. You left out Ethier Repko, Martin, Betemit, Broxton Billingsley (and sometimes Werth). They all count as young'uns in my book.

As I've already said over at BBTF, I can't imagine the Dodgers signed Gonzo with the thought of having him play full-time.
Here's his splits vs. LHP:
2006 - 193 PA, 259/332/408/740
2005 - 192 PA, 269/359/389/748
2004 - 150 PA, 244/353/535/888
2003 - 245 PA, 223/302/400/702
2002 - 228 PA, 272/377/450/827
Aside from the small(er) sample size spike in '04, this looks like a player you want to platoon.
So, who plays left when there's a southpaw on the hill? Ethier hit them well (351/378/468/846), but who knows if that was a one-season fluke.

26
True. I was mostly thinking about guys that are likely to start the year in AAA. I hope that Loney is not relegated to having to spin his wheels in Vegas when he hit .380 there last year.

Everybody look at the sidebar and exult: somebody found a dumber way to spend forty-five million bucks than on Juan Pierre.

I for one don't agree with some of the pessimissm expressed by Ned's critics. Although I find the Pierre deal only tolerable, the Schmidt deal I think will be the best contract handed out this winter to a free agent pitcher (Matsusaka may end up a real thing, but that like the Carpentar extension is a special case of sorts), and with Saito, I think our bullpen will be pretty good. I think our lineup will be fine in the end, and with so many kids waiting in the wings, I think it could be potentially a pretty high octane offense. Combined with the pitching, I think we'll be a serious contender this season.

WWSH

I assume another move will be forthcoming, too. Hopefully that will be a team's salary dump and will therefore not cost the Dodgers too many (or any) prospects. Though trading Penny now would be a classic case of selling low, I would rather deal him than nearly any of our prospects right now.

Also, between Nomar, Kent and Gonzo, there's chances for injuries aplenty, so whoever the reserves are they'll have more than a few opportunities to start.

28. Unfortunately, I don't believe that Nomar can realistically play anywhere but first. We seem to be filling up the outfield and it make me wonder where that leaves Loney. I think it leaves him fighting with Ethier and Gonzo for playing time while Kemp scratches at the door.

"it means that we will not be trading for someone like Jacque Jones"

What makes you think so? Colletti is like a woman with a new checkbook. Spend, spend, spend. At some point (already?) he is going to end up with too many players he can't trade for legal reasons or undesireability, and the kids are the only ones he can jettison. McCourt should have left the stupid dork in Frisco where they kept him out of the cash drawer.

As a No. 8 hitter, how about Pierre? It means admitting you're an idiot, but it's probably optimal for the offense.

34 Insulting the Dodger front office and womankind in one short paragraph -- that's gotta be a record.

Best. Headline. Ever.

"Gonzo just pawn in game of life"

36 Nah, I coulda done better...

36. He's an angry elf.

D4P has a new soul mate. Hope the wife doesn't take it too hard.

Where in the batting order did Gonzalez hit for AZ? 5th?

34. On behalf of all DodgerThoughts youngsters:

What's a checkbook?

42 It's that thing that sits next to the typewriter.

Two things:

1) The Post-Dispatch claims that because the Dodgers haven't actually signed Schmidt yet the Cards still think they have a shot at him.

http://tinyurl.com/ybs844

2) The rumor that interests me most is that we would now trade Penny and Ethier for Vernon Wells. Regardless of whether that's true, I'd be open to trading Ethier in the right deal. I like him but I think he might be overvalued right now. I'd rather lose him and keep Kemp and Loney.

41- Most of his PA were in the three spot, second most in the fourth, last year. Sixth in one game.

So, assuming Kemp or Loney doesn't push anyone out the door in spring training, that leaves this lineup in Las Vegas, right?

2B Abreu
SS Hu
1B Loney
CF Kemp
3B LaRoche
LF Young
RF (minor league veteran)
C Bellorin

Miller could be in the rotation and Meloan in the pen.

I would kinda rather watch this team than the actual Dodgers. It just seems more exciting.

To fill that RF spot, the Dodgers could look to get back Micheal Restovich from the Cubs for Hendrickson: .293/.374/.560 in AAA Iowa.

15 Someone who can "contribute in any real way" at age 22 is likely to be a star at 27. Why would you want to trade the star 27 season for the "contributing" 22 season? You have to consider that value in looking at a pickup like Gonzo.

Look at what the Phils are getting out of Ryan Howard. Keep him on the shelf til he's 25 then let him dominiate from day 1. That's resource maximization.

25, 26 Meloan is another who will start the year in AAA, unless he makes the big league roster, which is a realistic possibility.

44. If that rumor proves to be true (HA!) then Colletti made the best move of the offseason. But, if he could get Wells, why would he have signed Pierre? I can't believe anyone would take a Wells rumor seriously, besides, it seems like most of the moves (and especially the trades) by the Dodgers the last couple years weren't rumored all that much before they were announced.

44
I REALLY like that deal that you just proposed if we do in fact have Schmidt. I like Ethier, but if we could get Wells, even for a single season, that would put us over the top:

Furcal
Pierre
Nomar
Wells
Kent
Gonzo/Loney
Martin
Betemit

Schmidt
Lowe
Bills
Wolf
Kuo

That is your NL West Champion right there...

That's betting the bird in the hand for the two somewhere in the middle of the rainforrest. If Kemp promises to be Ryan Howard in 3 years (but only Juan Pierre until then) then I'll go with that. Otherwise, I still say produce and you shall play.

47 The thinking may be something along the lines of, well, Matt Kemp and Luis Gonzalez are likely to have similar production in 2007. So for the $7 million it took to sign Gonzo, you've purchased Kemp's age 27 season, when who knows, he could be hitting 40 homers or somthing. And you've also avoided punting the 2007 season.

But seriously, folks... as completely insane as the "put mediocre or worse veterans ahead of prospects who might already be better" plan is, and as redundant as trading a good SP for yet another veteran OFer seems, I do see an opportunity to restock. Seems to me that Colletti should trade Hendrickson, Hall, Dessens (if he can), Tomko, and other flotsam for future draft picks. Wait, can you trade for draft picks in baseball (I might be confused here). If not picks, then minor leaguers who are several years away. Whereas DePodesta faced a farm system with nothing ripe to harvest, Colletti's farm is bursting at the seams. Time to re-plant the back forty.

49 Because he doesn't yet know if he can get Wells, and if you don't have a centerfielder, a lot of balls are going to roll to the wall.

That doesn't explain why he signed Pierre instead of just re-upping Lofton, though.

I think the best assessment of the Gonzo signing (or Pierre's for that matter) is that we're all dreaming up subsequent moves for other outfielders.

53 You can't trade for draft picks, no. Even after they've been drafted they can't be traded for a year.

Who would take those guys for good young talent? GM's aren't nearly as dumb as fans think, but go ahead and delude yourself if thats your fancy.

BTW, the "put mediocre or worse veterans ahead of prospects who might already be better plan" is hardly 'insane'. It seems like the best plan unless you (a) want to win it all now or (b) don't care about going to the playoffs. Never mind the concept of letting the prospects coming up at there own pace.

If we'd only offered arbitration to freakin Maddux and Gagne, though, we'd be in good shape for the 2007 draft. As it stands now, all we've done is exchange the #20 pick for the #22 pick.

52
So, the question is, are the Dodgers being being very short sighted or very far sighted? People always make the assumption that signing an old player is a short term move, especially if it holds back prospects, but with a one year contract like Gonzo's I think it's more of a look to the future. You're actually making the team younger in the long term, and getting the most value out of your prosects. Of course, if they turn around and trade those prospects then that theory is out the window.

55. Not I. I'm pretty happy with the way the offseason has gone, thus far. I also think Colletti's pretty much done, unless someone offers him great trade for a starter, or some minor trade involving Hendrickson for a spare part (ie, minor league reliever or utility player).

Colletti's made one bone-head move (Pierre) one move that looks very good (Wolf) and the rest look decent enough but we'll have to see how the chips fall on the field for final judgement.

I think Colletti is getting depth for a trade and to supplement injuries.

We've got the old and the young. We're going to have plenty of injuries to deal with (like in the past few years).

He's going to make moves, no doubt. But he better still keep some guys around to fill-in for Gonzo, Nomar, Kent, etc...

I don't think we'd get compensation for Maddux even if we did offer him arbitration, players can only give their former teams compensation once, according to the former CBA.

The way that the Dodgers have treated Gagne this offseason speaks very poorly for the health of his right arm.

"Gagne's agent, Scott Boras, turned down a guaranteed one-year, $4-million Dodgers offer with incentives that could have increased the value to $10 million, a source close to the negotiations said." - from Henson's article today. What part of that speaks poorly for the health of his arm?

62
I think it's more likely his back that's concerning them than his arm. Even Gagne made comments to the press about a conditioning program to strengthen his "leg power" for this year - sounds like a bum back to me...

59 Except, there was this bit in the Times' story this morning: The Dodgers made a two-year offer to Gonzalez earlier Wednesday, but the 17-year veteran opted to take a higher salary for one year.

Why on earth would Ned want Gonzo for two years if he was looking to the future? I have my doubts on whether Gonzo is even going to put up replacement-level numbers this year, never mind 2008.

Ned does not trust his prospects at all. Injuries opened the door for Martin, Ethier, Broxton and Billingsly last season, but Ned will not intentionally open up any spots for rookies. As Ned sees it, a useless has-been like Gonzo is preferable to Kemp in 2008. Not just this season. 2008.

63. I hadnt seen that yet

Oooo,errr...

"bum back" - I can't mix body parts here. I should have said "bad back"...

but go ahead and delude yourself if thats your fancy.

Thanks. I enjoy being called stupid before breakfast.

Duh. But isn't part of Logan White's supposed magic that he is better at evaluating talent than most of his counterparts on other teams? I'm not saying we should swap Tomko for the consensus #1 pick 2 years ago. I'm saying let White find someone he likes in other teams' systems, who might be extractable for a team that needs a back-of-the-rotation starter now.

Giving a job to Kemp at 22 is a no win situation. If he sucks, like he did last year with an OPS+ of 84, then you've just wasted some of his sevice time for a negative result. If he's good, then the odds are down the road you're going to wish you'd held him back, because when he hitss his prime he'll be GREAT, and you'll have to pay him 20 million per.

These are the 2006 leading homerun hitters that have played outfield in order of most homeruns hit. Some of the spellings were shortened to make fit.

Griffey could be had perhaps for Penny and he fits the aging vet aquisition profile.

The younger players look good but their teams grew them just like the Dodgers need to do if they want good young players on their team.

Player HR RBI BA OBP
Sorano 46 95 0.2767 0.3512
Berkman 45 136 0.3153 0.4195
Dye, 44 120 0.3154 0.3846
Beltran 41 116 0.2745 0.3880
Jones 41 129 0.2619 0.3632
Dunn, 40 92 0.2335 0.3651
Lee, 37 116 0.2997 0.3554
Bay, 35 109 0.2860 0.3962
Hall 35 85 0.2700 0.3455
Ramirez 35 102 0.3207 0.4391
Swisher 35 95 0.2536 0.3716
Holiday 34 114 0.3256 0.3868
Guerero 33 116 0.3295 0.3820
Ibanez, 33 123 0.2891 0.3534
Wells, 32 106 0.3028 0.3575
Hunter 31 98 0.2783 0.3355
Burrell 29 95 0.2576 0.3880
Frncour 29 103 0.2596 0.2930
Monroe 28 92 0.2551 0.3009
Sizemor 28 76 0.2901 0.3747
Griffey 27 72 0.2523 0.3157
Jones, 27 81 0.2852 0.3339
Bonds 26 77 0.2698 0.4544
Byrnes, 26 79 0.2669 0.3129
Cabrera 26 114 0.3385 0.4305
Thames, 26 60 0.2557 0.3333
Wilnghm 26 74 0.2769 0.3560
Cuddyer 24 109 0.2837 0.3622
Damon, 24 80 0.2850 0.3587
Kearns 24 86 0.2644

Gil Meche is getting 55-60 million over 5 years...wow

This Gonzo signing tells me that Ned doesn't like building a starting team with prospects.
I think Ned likes the prospects as backups only except Martin (who plays the position most baseball people consider the position you least need offense from).
Ned's a veteran guy who inherited a strong farm system and has decided to use the farm system as insurance only.
That kind of thinking will never get you over the top, but it will keep you hanging around, or, keep you on the map, or, keep you in contention (but not for a championship).

The Gonzo and Pierre money could have gone to Zito, and the dodgers would have been a way better team with Zito and without Gonzo and Pierre.

from the royals

One very expensive late season pinch hitter.Glad its not my $$$.
It now seems less likely though that we will be losing significant young talent unless of course there is a blockbuster trade out there.That may be the silver lining.

(For Andrew.)

So here I sit, waylaid by the powerfully somnambulant effects of a head cold and a grant-writing workshop (a potentially lethal combination), basking in the plasticized atmosphere of a small but friendly auditorium in Little Rock, Arkansas – where, it must be noted, middleweight champion Jermain Taylor will fight tomorrow night, and where the Angels' AA franchise (the Travelers) play, and where Rob McM (he of 6-4-2 fame) occasionally visits his in-laws and intakes a near-toxic dose of our most treasured in-state commodities: humidity and Southern Baptists – and I wonder if perhaps, just perhaps, we've got this all wrong; that perhaps, just perhaps, our hand-wringing and naysaying and all-out bloviating might be somewhat unjustified – that our illustrious general manager and his consortium of yes men and geriatric scouts and Kim Ng (who, Bill Singer be darned, defies stereotyping and blind categorization and is the graceful, forceful center of balance for our franchise) indeed has a plan, an intricate plan carefully orchestrated and even more carefully executed, a plan that on its face appears so stultifyingly dumb – dumb as a slice of boiled ham, if you will – as to be downright insulting (and beneficial to your average Juan) but in reality is remarkably brilliant in its scope and tack – a real tour de force of baseball front-officery, a house blend of all things SABR and sexagenarian scouts, perhaps even writ large on a display pad that's kept in Ned Colletti's Orlando suite and is closely guarded by Bill Mueller himself, a plan that should – nay, will! – bring joy to Mudville (population: us) that we haven't known since 1988, except for fleeting, momentary vignettes – the Finley homer, the Beltre season, the Gagne streak – that provide faint promise but no sustenance for those who want so badly to again have – what's that word – hope.

72 The Gonzo and Pierre money could have gone to Zito, and the dodgers would have been a way better team with Zito and without Gonzo and Pierre.

Which year were you talking about?

72 The Gonzo and Pierre money could have gone to Zito, and the dodgers would have been a way better team with Zito and without Gonzo and Pierre.

Which year were you talking about?

68 I'm saying let White find someone he likes in other teams' systems, who might be extractable for a team that needs a back-of-the-rotation starter now.

Given that the Royals, of all teams, just gave Gil Meche (a pitcher clearly no better than Tomko, and perhaps worse) $11M a year, the possibility of shipping a "cheap" Tomko off for useful minor leaguers does not seem farfetched at all.

I would say try to deal Hendrickson first (because for some reason my gut says Tomko has more value in the pen) but if either of these guys can land us an outfield prospect or two, pull the trigger. Kuo/Billingsley, Miller, Alexander, Houlton, maybe Meloan or Elbert...we've got bullpen replacements. And the market for "proven starters" looks to be a seller's market.

Re: 72

I think there's a big difference between not wanting to hand youngsters starting jobs before ST starts (think Tracy and Joe Thurston and Edwin Jackson), and only conceiving of them as backups. And I think assuming that Ned is doing the latter due to a series of short-term contracts (Wolf and Gonzo--Pierre is a different issue, because Kemp may not be able to play CF) is purely conjecture in my view.

WWSH

If the Gagne report in the LA Times is true, I think I can understand why a GM would never want to deal with Boras again. An offer for 4 million guaranteed plus incentives paying up to 10 million for a guy that basically was on the shelf for two seasons (while being paid a handsome 20 million dollar sum), that's beyond fair - that's a huge risk for the team and an obvious nod toward